The third annual survey of state and federal “e-governments” conducted at Brown University shows that government Web sites have improved their security and privacy provisions over last year. However, there has been a proliferation of Internet services and Web sites that offer access only to registered users or in some cases only to users who pay fees. Top e-government states this year include Tennessee, New Jersey, California, Connecticut and Pennsylvania.

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — The latest analysis of “e-government”
conducted by researchers at Brown University has found that Web sites and
Internet services offered by state and federal government agencies are devoting
more attention to security and privacy but also are creating a larger number of
restricted areas online.

Darrell M. West, director of the Taubman Center for Public Policy at Brown
University, and a team of public policy students examined 1,265 state and
federal Web sites and evaluated the variety and quality of the electronic
services they offered. The researchers ranked those sites on a 100-point scale
based on information and service availability, quality of citizen access, and
material that would help citizens hold leaders accountable. Of the sites
evaluated, 1,206 were state government sites (an average of 24 per state), 46
were federal legislative or executive sites, and 13 were federal court sites.
Previous studies were released in 2000 and 2001. Financial support for these
projects was provided by Brown University.

Since the last study, which was issued Sept. 10, 2001, governments are taking
security and privacy measures much more seriously than they did in previous
years. Forty-three percent of government Web sites displayed privacy policies,
up from 28 percent in 2001. Thirty-four percent now have a visible security
policy, up from 18 percent last year.

The increased attention to security, however, has created an increase in the
presence of restricted areas on government Web sites that require usernames and
passwords. Six percent of sites have restricted areas and 1 percent have areas
requiring payment for entry. Governments are creating restricted areas for a
variety of reasons, such as an interest in providing services and a greater
focus on security. The danger of premium sites requiring payment and restricted
areas, West said, is that they encourage the creation of a
“two-class” e-government system, where free and open access to
governmental services is not available to all.

In addition, there was a substantial drop in government responsiveness to
e-mail queries. Using a short question – “I would like to know what
hours your agency is open during the week. Thanks for your help” –
researchers sent e-mails to the human services department within each state.
E-mail responses were recorded based on whether the office responded and how
long it took in business days. In general, public officials were not as
responsive this year as last. Where 80 percent answered the sample query last
year, only 55 percent did so this year.

The study ranked the 50 states on overall e-government performance. Using
measures such as online services, attention to privacy and security, disability
access, foreign language translation and Web site personalization, among other
features, the research team rated the various state sites and compared their
performance to last year. The top ranking state was Tennessee with 56 out of the
possible 100 points, followed closely by New Jersey (55.0), California (54.8),
Connecticut (53.3) and Pennsylvania (52.9). The states achieving the lowest
rankings were Wyoming (34.8), Alabama (35.8) and Mississippi (37.4). The
following table shows where each state ranked in 2002, with the previous
year’s ranking or score in parentheses.

Among federal sites, the Federal Communications Commission scored a 92,
followed by the Department of Labor (88), the Environmental Protection Agency
(84), the Department of Treasury (84), the Department of State (84), the Social
Security Administration (80) and the FirstGov portal (80). The federal sites
that had the lowest ratings were the various Circuit Courts of Appeal. The
following table lists the ranking of federal agencies in 2002, with last
year’s rank or score in parentheses.

Federal rankings for 2002(Previous year’s rank or score in parentheses)

Sites which have lost 15 or more places include the Food and Drug Administration (down 40), Department of Veterans Affairs (down 24), Department of Defense (down 23), Consumer Product Safety Commission (down 21), Housing and Urban Development (down 21), and Small Business Administration (down 15).

In the conclusion of their report, West and his research team suggest several
means to improve e-government Web sites. Among their recommendations are the
following:

Employ consistent design and navigational principles so that users of
e-government services may move among different agencies and offices without
confronting radically different user interfaces, search techniques and other
impediments.

Integrate state agency Web sites into a state portal or gateway Web site.
This enables citizens to locate desired services by surfing either the portal
page or the agency Web site.

Minimize use of areas that require premium fees. Placing additional charges
on governmental services deters free and open access to electronic governance.

Increase access to interactive technologies. The public sector has yet to
implement successfully two-way communications devices, Web site personalization
and credit card payments on the majority of its pages.

Provide a clear and consistent privacy/security policy. The state of
Connecticut, for example, has linked every agency in its borders to a common
portal outlining the state’s policy in these areas.

For more information about the results of this study, contact Darrell West at
(401) 863-1163or see the full report at
www.InsidePolitics.org. The appendix of that report provides profiles of
e-government offerings for each of the 50 states and the federal agencies.